Ric Stern-Pro or Con?

bozy said:

Ric Stern-You represent yourself as a University Graduate and ABCC member to create the image of a professional bicycle coach. Since you seek to represent yourself as a professional, you must adhere to professional standards.

When a professional provides information to others in a public forum, such as this website, he has the obligation of revealing any and all of his conflicts of interest. Such complete disclosure is the standard of behavior for professionals in Great Britain and elsewhere. Your attempt to shift the burden of this duty to an unwitting public is unprofessional and ethically unacceptable.
You have your own commercial website where the public may easily recognize your legitimate purpose-to sell your products and services. But isn't Cyclingforums.com yet another of your commercial websites? You refuse to acknowledge your financial relationship to the site but it is probable that you support the site financially. When you render an opinion on Cyclingforums the public cannot know your real motivation-is it to inform, malign a competitor, or to sell your own services? Interestestingly, and deceptively, you style yourself as a "Super-Moderator" on Cyclingforums, but you are not merely a moderator, but by virtue of your financial relationship to the site, a covert entrepreneur and censor. Since your relationship the site is nowhere stated, one must conclude that your motive is to deceive. Furthermore, those who disagree with your opinions are seen by you as damaging your business prospects and are either vilified or banished from your Cyclingforums site. These are not the actions of a professional.
Have you no sense of decency Mr. Stern?
The only honest and professional course of action to take is to make a public disclosure on Cyclingforums.com revealing your financial relationship to the site, and, furthermore, the services and products which you offer for sale here. This statement should be conspicuous and permanent-obvious to all who enter the site. Members who disagree with your opinions must not be censored or banished simply because your business prospects might be diminished.
The decision is yours Mr. Stern-do you want to be considered a professional coach or a con-artist?

George Hollenberg, i'll make this clear to you again, i have not maligned the SRM cranks, i have merely stated what is well known about them. These data are reported in the Gardner paper, and the static calibration on the SRM site, was i believe (happy to be wrong on this) developed by British Cycling.

I do recommend the SRM cranks to people as well as the Power Tap hub. However, as reported by the Gardner paper and some others that are either in press or about to go to press it is known that they often come from the factory poorly calibrated -- especially the Amateurs and often has issues with linearlity as well. This is also confirmed by SRM previously, and has been confirmed by other people on this forum, and of course at the Topica/Wattage list site. There is nothing i have said (about the SRMs) that is not well known in other locations.

I refuse to do anything that you suggest, simply you're a bully, an incompetent, and as my father would say "a spoilt little brat".

Nobody gets banned or censored for having a different opinion to me. In fact i welcome people to have different opinions and for this to lead to a discussion. If nothing else, these discussions can lead to interesting exchanges which allow me to better develop any ideas i have or to discard an existing idea.

People generally get banned at this site, through derogatory comments, racial overtones, insulting behavious, spam, data mining... etc. There's no reason to ban someone because they have a different opinion and in fact there's been a few *huge* discussions that have taken place, where people have had differing opinions.

As it happens it clearly states on the front page that i am a sponsor of the site (along with others).

I do not vilify anyone on this site (or others) with the exception that i especially make for you. George, you should not act the injured party as 1) you made a rod for your own back by being insulting too many in the first instance, and 2) sent me a threatening email.

At present George, you've been incorrect on every issue you've tried to discuss, e.g., cranks, strength/weights, coaching/ABCC, you're thus not adding anything to anyone's knowledge and just wasting bandwidth.

Ric Stern pro or con? So far, judging by the other thread i have an idea which way people lean. I believe that we've had more complaints and people laughing at you.

I'm reminded of the fact that discussing things with an idiot brings you down to their level.

Ric

ric_stern/RST said:

George Hollenberg, i'll make this clear to you again, i have not maligned the SRM cranks, i have merely stated what is well known about them. These data are reported in the Gardner paper, and the static calibration on the SRM site, was i believe (happy to be wrong on this) developed by British Cycling.

I do recommend the SRM cranks to people as well as the Power Tap hub. However, as reported by the Gardner paper and some others that are either in press or about to go to press it is known that they often come from the factory poorly calibrated -- especially the Amateurs and often has issues with linearlity as well. This is also confirmed by SRM previously, and has been confirmed by other people on this forum, and of course at the Topica/Wattage list site. There is nothing i have said (about the SRMs) that is not well known in other locations.

I refuse to do anything that you suggest, simply you're a bully, an incompetent, and as my father would say "a spoilt little brat".

Nobody gets banned or censored for having a different opinion to me. In fact i welcome people to have different opinions and for this to lead to a discussion. If nothing else, these discussions can lead to interesting exchanges which allow me to better develop any ideas i have or to discard an existing idea.

People generally get banned at this site, through derogatory comments, racial overtones, insulting behavious, spam, data mining... etc. There's no reason to ban someone because they have a different opinion and in fact there's been a few *huge* discussions that have taken place, where people have had differing opinions.

As it happens it clearly states on the front page that i am a sponsor of the site (along with others).

I do not vilify anyone on this site (or others) with the exception that i especially make for you. George, you should not act the injured party as 1) you made a rod for your own back by being insulting too many in the first instance, and 2) sent me a threatening email.

At present George, you've been incorrect on every issue you've tried to discuss, e.g., cranks, strength/weights, coaching/ABCC, you're thus not adding anything to anyone's knowledge and just wasting bandwidth.

Ric Stern pro or con? So far, judging by the other thread i have an idea which way people lean. I believe that we've had more complaints and people laughing at you.

I'm reminded of the fact that discussing things with an idiot brings you down to their level.

Ric

Ric-seems from your rhetoric that this post has struck close to home!
But your response is not that of a professional.
Some of the language in this diatribe might get you banished from your very own site! Some of it may even be actionable under law!
Furthermore, your reply is not responsive to the issue at hand- your behavior has nothing to do with me or SRM-are you going to act in professonal manner or not?
I encourage you to think before replying and to do the right thing.

bozy said:

Ric-seems from your rhetoric that this post has struck close to home!
But your response is not that of a professional.
Some of the language in this diatribe might get you banished from your very own site! Some of it may even be actionable under law!
Furthermore, your reply is not responsive to the issue at hand- your behavior has nothing to do with me or SRM-are you going to act in professonal manner or not?
I encourage you to think before replying and to do the right thing.

There's nothing here to get me banned. or actionable.

Oh God!!!! BOZY SHUT UP!!!!! I for one am aware of Mr. Sterns support of this site. I do not see it as a conflict of interest since he allows differing points of view to be freely expressed. Even personal attacks like yours.

This is an amazing waste of bandwidth. adds nothing to the community. I am sure you do have somethingto add. Houwever, right now I am not aware of what that might be. So please stop with the personal attacks until you do have something meaningfull to add. The rancor is making me discount you on every subject. even the ones you might actually be an authorith in.

jerryz said:

Oh God!!!! BOZY SHUT UP!!!!! I for one am aware of Mr. Sterns support of this site. I do not see it as a conflict of interest since he allows differing points of view to be freely expressed. Even personal attacks like yours.

This is an amazing waste of bandwidth. adds nothing to the community. I am sure you do have somethingto add. Houwever, right now I am not aware of what that might be. So please stop with the personal attacks until you do have something meaningfull to add. The rancor is making me discount you on every subject. even the ones you might actually be an authorith in.

Until Ric makes a complete disclosure of his conflicts of interest he can't be considered a professional. The community is very, very interested in this. It may be the single most important issue ever broached here-everyone is interested in intellectual honesty-especially in the case of a "Super-moderator." Is he informing us or selling us? We just can't know, can we? It's obvious that he has little use for divergent points of view-that's fine-so long as we know his real agenda. This is the standard of behavior for professionals in a public forum.
Our only interest is in Ric's professional behavior-we are not interested in his personal behavior.
I hold no rancor for Ric-only disappointment in his failure to act like a professioanal.
In fact, I'm hoping he'll change his behavior!

bozy said:

Until Ric makes a complete disclosure of his conflicts of interest he can't be considered a professional. The community is very, very interested in this. It may be the single most important issue ever broached here-everyone is interested in intellectual honesty-especially in the case of a "Super-moderator." Is he informing us or selling us? We just can't know, can we? It's obvious that he has little use for divergent points of view-that's fine-so long as we know his real agenda. This is the standard of behavior for professionals in a public forum.
Our only interest is in Ric's professional behavior-we are not interested in his personal behavior.
I hold no rancor for Ric-only disappointment in his failure to act like a professioanal.
In fact, I'm hoping he'll change his behavior!

Our? who exactly is our? Mr. full discosure?

jerryz said:

Our? who exactly is our? Mr. full discosure?

This has already been asked and answered.
The onus is now on Ric to make full disclosure of his conflicts of interest and play the role of a true professional.
No rational person could object. It's the standard of behavior for professionals.
The real mystery is why he just doesn' t want to do the right thing.
It makes no sense at all.

bozy said:

This has already been asked and answered.
The onus is now on Ric to make full disclosure of his conflicts of interest and play the role of a true professional.
No rational person could object. It's the standard of behavior for professionals.
The real mystery is why he just doesn' t want to do the right thing.
It makes no sense at all.

Why are you asking Ric to do what he has already done?

dkrenik said:

Why are you asking Ric to do what he has already done?

Ric has done nothing and insists he will do nothing. Yet he want's to be considered a professional. Very unprofessional behavior-don't you think?

He needs to disclose his conflicts of interest. Acknowledging Cyclingforums.com as just another of his own commerical websites would be a small first step-wouldn't it be more honest to call it "Stern cyling forum?" He's not a "Super-Moderator," for sure. Moderators don't pitch products-they're not covert entrepreneurs. Their duty is to prevent bias-not promote products and services!

What products and services is he selling on this website? Coaching services? Power Meters? What else? Is he taking money from manufacturers or other sources to push their products? We really don't know. The fact that he is unwilling to disclose these facts and, in fact, has reacted very negatively to the suggestion, would led to the suspicion that he's got something to hide.
What other problem could there be here?

It's obvious that this disclosure is critical-when you're getting information from an sales person you're going to have a vastly different take on that information than when it's received from a nonbiased professional (that's Ric's persona).

bozy said:

Ric has done nothing and insists he will do nothing. Yet he want's to be considered a professional. Very unprofessional behavior-don't you think?

He needs to disclose his conflicts of interest. Acknowledging Cyclingforums.com as just another of his own commerical websites would be a small first step-wouldn't it be more honest to call it "Stern cyling forum?" He's not a "Super-Moderator," for sure. Moderators don't pitch products-they're not covert entrepreneurs. Their duty is to prevent bias-not promote products and services!

What products and services is he selling on this website? Coaching services? Power Meters? What else? Is he taking money from manufacturers or other sources to push their products? We really don't know. The fact that he is unwilling to disclose these facts and, in fact, has reacted very negatively to the suggestion, would led to the suspicion that he's got something to hide.
What other problem could there be here?

It's obvious that this disclosure is critical-when you're getting information from an sales person you're going to have a vastly different take on that information than when it's received from a nonbiased professional (that's Ric's persona).

I belive that if we simply ignore bozy he will stop posting and go away.

yzfrr11 said:

I belive that if we simply ignore bozy he will stop posting and go away.

Many people have gone away and many will go away.
But Ric's problems with honesty and integrity won't go away.

jerryz said:

Oh God!!!! BOZY SHUT UP!!!!!

Allow me to second (and third, and fourth, and fifth, etc.) that sentiment.

bozy said:

Acknowledging Cyclingforums.com as just another of his own commerical websites would be a small first step-wouldn't it be more honest to call it "Stern cyling forum?"

This website is not owned by ric. We are not a public company and therefore don't have to disclose financial or business interests to anyone except those concerned.

Members are only banned if they offened others or SPAM the forum. They are not banned for things like disagreeing with ric for example.

If you have any issues feel free to take it up with me privately.

regards

bozy said:

Many people have gone away and many will go away.
But Ric's problems with honesty and integrity won't go away.

I have to say thanks you Bozy, you have provided me and others with a good ten minutes worth of entertainment over the last few days.

But take the hint and give it up, no one here cares what you think.

You are like a mentally retarded man hitting himself in the head! Funny in a sick kind of way for 30 seconds, annoying after a couple of minutes, and after that you are only damaging yourself.

Give up! go troll somewhere else.

Bear

By posting advice and information on this forum, Ric is giving away free what he could, as a professional coach, be charging for. I guess that this is a conflict of interests but shoudn't bother anyone else.
If you don't like his advice you could ignore it; if you have an alternative veiwpoint then you are can post it. I look forward to reading your opinions but not when you abandon the original subject and start banging on about Ric's integrity or professionalism.

Just a general comment as I watched this little tirade yesterday.

If you are a veteran of forums and you have any intellect about the subject matter, you will begin to sift out those whom you deem credible. Each one has contributed something valuable to a discussion or at least made a worthy contribution.

There are some of those individuals that have consistently made valuable contributions that I hold in my mind. That is not to say that I agree with every single comment, but then again I am here to learn and discuss this subject with this group and sift through any fallacies that I may hold.

Those on my list to watch are:

Ric Stern and the other associate coaches at RST
acogan
Don Shipp
Roadie Scum
Orange Fish
Biker_linz
Doctor Morbius (when he is not venting about computer jobs going overseas 😄 )

.....I am sure there are some others, but this is my main list that has made an impression on me at some time or another.

Just a note. There are some here that have made the opposite impression.
It teaches me to be careful about what I post.
There have been times in the past on other forums I let my emotions get the best of me and made regrettable comments and the bad thing was that I could not delete those comments. Once I calmed down I realized that I ended up looking more like a moron than the other guy. Learn from mistakes and learn how to make constructive discussions and learn how to properly debate a topic.

My General Rule to follow
Those who lose their cool in a debate are the ones who lose the debate.
That is generally the perception of the audience in these conditions.

bozy said:

Until Ric makes a complete disclosure of his conflicts of interest he can't be considered a professional. The community is very, very interested in this. It may be the single most important issue ever broached here-everyone is interested in intellectual honesty-especially in the case of a "Super-moderator." Is he informing us or selling us? We just can't know, can we? It's obvious that he has little use for divergent points of view-that's fine-so long as we know his real agenda. This is the standard of behavior for professionals in a public forum.
Our only interest is in Ric's professional behavior-we are not interested in his personal behavior.
I hold no rancor for Ric-only disappointment in his failure to act like a professioanal.
In fact, I'm hoping he'll change his behavior!

How can there be any conflict of interest by providing a free service (www.cyclingforums.com)? Ric (and the other owners) have to pay for us free loaders some how. I don't see what the problem is....

Felt_Rider said:

Just a general comment as I watched this little tirade yesterday.

If you are a veteran of forums and you have any intellect about the subject matter, you will begin to sift out those whom you deem credible. Each one has contributed something valuable to a discussion or at least made a worthy contribution.

There are some of those individuals that have consistently made valuable contributions that I hold in my mind. That is not to say that I agree with every single comment, but then again I am here to learn and discuss this subject with this group and sift through any fallacies that I may hold.

Those on my list to watch are:

Ric Stern and the other associate coaches at RST
acogan
David Shipp
Roadie Scum
Orange Fish
Biker_linz
Doctor Morbius (when he is not venting about computer jobs going overseas 😄 )

.....I am sure there are some others, but this is my main list that has made an impression on me at some time or another.

Just a note. There are some here that have made the opposite impression.
It teaches me to be careful about what I post.
There have been times in the past on other forums I let my emotions get the best of me and made regrettable comments and the bad thing was that I could not delete those comments. Once I calmed down I realized that I ended up looking more like a moron than the other guy. Learn from mistakes and learn how to make constructive discussions and learn how to properly debate a topic.

My General Rule to follow
Those who lose their cool in a debate are the ones who lose the debate.
That is generally the perception of the audience in these conditions.

Felt Rider, I'd add you to that list of posters to watch too. I've seen many a good post with your name on them. 🙂

Don Shipp said:

By posting advice and information on this forum, Ric is giving away free what he could, as a professional coach, be charging for. I guess that this is a conflict of interests but shoudn't bother anyone else.
If you don't like his advice you could ignore it; if you have an alternative veiwpoint then you are can post it. I look forward to reading your opinions but not when you abandon the original subject and start banging on about Ric's integrity or professionalism.

Nothing is being given away here. This is a commercial website not a philanthropy.
The problem is what products and services are being sold by the people giving the "free advice?" Since you don't know (they won't tell) you can't evaluate what you're being told.